You pay ton more money for a screen thats ppi is too dense to matter only to to pay ton more money for a pc to still run it at terrible framerate with lowered settings and fake frames.
Yes its pointless, most noticable is the low frame rate and lowered graphics to make the game playable.
High fps is more noticable and useful. Blind tests confirmed that, even the one ltt did.
2k could be argued is solid but even then the ppi is so dense already it does not really matter.
Edit: then again there is some research showing people preceive fps and ppindifferently so it may be 4k makes sense for some while for others its really overpriced 2k that no pc can run.
I play in 1080p so can’t comment on 4k but I can confirm fps doesn’t seem to affect me after 30fps. I don’t perceive a noticeable difference between 30, 60, 120fps. Haven’t played higher than that. I suspect 4k would probably look better to me than a higher fps though. But I’m happy with 30-60fps and 1080p so…
I went to 2k 100hz uw from 1080p 144hz.
I stopped noticing the increased framerate pretty quickly as the “mouse so smooth” effects wear off fast.
But the ultrawide huge fov is a massive plus. I don’t notice the resolution increase at all beyond lower frames and more text on screen in docs.
Laptops 4k is just 1080p with extra battery drain and worse performance.
Not arguing FPS here lol. Arguing 4k, which you can run in 144hz in a lot of games even without a 5090, you failed to mention if you had tried 4k which I assume you haven’t based on the switch to FPS instead of resolution
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
You pay ton more money for a screen thats ppi is too dense to matter only to to pay ton more money for a pc to still run it at terrible framerate with lowered settings and fake frames.
4k is a pure scam.
Have you tried 4k? The difference is definitely noticeable unless you play on like a 20" screen
Yes its pointless, most noticable is the low frame rate and lowered graphics to make the game playable. High fps is more noticable and useful. Blind tests confirmed that, even the one ltt did.
2k could be argued is solid but even then the ppi is so dense already it does not really matter.
Edit: then again there is some research showing people preceive fps and ppindifferently so it may be 4k makes sense for some while for others its really overpriced 2k that no pc can run.
I play in 1080p so can’t comment on 4k but I can confirm fps doesn’t seem to affect me after 30fps. I don’t perceive a noticeable difference between 30, 60, 120fps. Haven’t played higher than that. I suspect 4k would probably look better to me than a higher fps though. But I’m happy with 30-60fps and 1080p so…
I went to 2k 100hz uw from 1080p 144hz. I stopped noticing the increased framerate pretty quickly as the “mouse so smooth” effects wear off fast. But the ultrawide huge fov is a massive plus. I don’t notice the resolution increase at all beyond lower frames and more text on screen in docs.
Laptops 4k is just 1080p with extra battery drain and worse performance.
Not arguing FPS here lol. Arguing 4k, which you can run in 144hz in a lot of games even without a 5090, you failed to mention if you had tried 4k which I assume you haven’t based on the switch to FPS instead of resolution
Fair.